Jump to content

WW2 Flight Sims


Barton
 Share

Recommended Posts

Good video.

 

I think you misspoke at 1:20.  You say 1946 was supposed to be the successor to 1946. :)

 

Personally, my biggest problem with BoS is ROF.  Yes, I love ROF.  And Butzzell has been able to make ROF sing for Flanders In Flames.   But ROF's back-end coding and mission building parameters are anemic.  Even by 2009 standards.  1946 was more robust.

 

And unfortunately, 777 basically used ROF's structure and back-end to jump start BoS.  1C needed a profitable game in less than 2 years.  CloD was abandoned in October 2012.  BoS was released in October 2014.  You can't make a sim that fast without basing it on something.

 

But compare BoS' back-end to what's possible with the mission builders in CloD and DCS, and you'll see what I mean.

 

BoS is at a HUGE disadvantaged when compared to other WW2 sims because it's an updated ROF structure in a WW2 shell.  There can never be a complex Ghost Skies-like tournament for BoS.  It's just not technically possible.  And that's a huge disadvantage for BoS, because it means that hardcore squadrons (like JG1) are less likely to commit to BoS for the long haul.  That doesn't mean we don't enjoy flying it.  It just means that the majority of us will always be waiting for something else.

 

And I don't think they can improve BoS's back-end, which is why they've moved into the same pattern as they did with ROF.  From here on out, it'll just be new maps and new aircraft, with minor adjustments to the game and it's functionality.  I think the problem is so imbedded in the sim that they'd have to rewrite the entire thing to fix it, which isn't possible.

 

That's my 10 cents though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what to think of any of the choices. CLoD I'm waiting for the official patch.

 

Bos series I find it bull crap that you can't see a contact above you. You should be able to pick out a target against the clear blue sky. I am hoping they do a good job on the Pacific that is my 1st love for WW2 sims. But I wont hold my breath.  

 

 DCS I havent flown any of the WW2 aircraft. I guess I'm waiting to see the Normandy map and what they plan on doing for the future. Not to mention I haven't flown online there, and the lack of any single player Dynamic campaign has me turned off with DCS. DCS just feels like a different kind of mess great planes but now what? What servers should I fly? Quick mission oh wait I'm in a F86 against mig 29s that doesn't seem fair.

 

I originally flew online in Warbirds. The guys I flew with and I got sick of it and left for Aces High. Warbirds was just throttle control. Aces High was basic pitch and throttle which thought was awesome. I eventually left AH didn't know where to go so I tried out ROF. Same thing I thought hey I have to control my mixture radiators and engines etc this is great.

 

For me each new sim I joined online was more immersive more hands on then the last and I liked it so why don't I feel that way about BOS. It might be a lot of little things. Flight models feel sloppy damage models could be better etc. Online I'm not so sure about either.  I flew the TAW server a bit thought it was great that there where no map icons, you had to be careful that you didn't lose your planes, however the fact that its an imbalanced server with infighting in the forums plus no side switching is a turn off. WOL server has map icons on which after ROF I just find it lazy to have them turned on. Plus not being able to see contacts above you. I can go out side and see a cesna a few 1000 feet above me but I can't see one in BOS. They seemed to have gone with too much eye candy and eye candy on a turd is still a turd.

 

So is this the pinnacle for flight sims for me? We can control most of the aspects of flight now so there shouldn't be much more to look forward to there. VR? Better graphics? No sir I don't think its the pinnacle but the climb the rest of the way might be rocky at times.

 

If I had to place a bet I'm betting on CLoD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

BoS is at a HUGE disadvantaged when compared to other WW2 sims because it's an updated ROF structure in a WW2 shell.  There can never be a complex Ghost Skies-like tournament for BoS.  It's just not technically possible.  And that's a huge disadvantage for BoS, because it means that hardcore squadrons (like JG1) are less likely to commit to BoS for the long haul.  That doesn't mean we don't enjoy flying it.  It just means that the majority of us will always be waiting for something else.

 

 

 

I was thinking about this at work this is where BoS is lacking.  Going back to when I flew Warbirds and Aces High they both had weekly organized events similar to FIF.

I just looked up Aces High's last event that was last Friday. 217 pilots showed up 108 vs 109. Now granted the graphics aren't as pretty as BoS but that is still impressive as far as an online flight sim vs server load. I doubt BoS servers would ever be able to pull that off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't get spoken about a lot because I think that the average virtual pilot is unaware that it's an issue.

 

Don't get me wrong, FIF functions very well.  But, a lot of FIF is done by hand.  We manually review the stats, manually check that there are no rules violation, and then use the honor system and self-monitoring within squadrons in order to ensure fair play.  Yes, objectives are often picked at random within the mission.  But, their initial placement is not randomized.  That's again done by hand.  Thus, Butzzell often has to recuse himself from any type of team leadership position.

 

Ideally, ROF (and therefore BoX) would have a death kick, for example.  Or at least, have the ability to bar people from jumping on the wrong team or taking the wrong load out.  But as far as I know this just isn't possible.  And this says nothing about the way objects are tracked in ROF / BoX.  In CloD or DCS, for example, an object is completely trackable, from it's initial placement all the way to its destruction.  This means that you can track it's fuel, it's supply levels, it's location, how it moves, when it moves, if it moves, etc.  And you can trigger statistical events based on those things.  That opens up doors for tournament creation.

 

To be fair, perhaps RoF and BoX are more robust than I give them credit for.  However, the underlying issue is the same.  You don't see very many dead-is-dead events in BoX because they're so difficult to coordinate within the current confines of what's possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys there seems to be a bit of missinformation about what is the BOS/M/K server capable.

I can't speak from mission designer point of view but I can tell you what I observed on the servers.

 

There is a possibility to lock loadouts. You can lock modification use and bomb loads. Its usualy used to lock the 2500kg bombs on Heinkel and 1800kg bomb for Stuka as they are overkill for most small targets. Or to lock bombs for FW and BF when they want to force bomber usage.

 

Death kick is not possible (AFAIK) but you can force a death pennalty wait period. Set it to 2 hours and you have the same thing.

A kick is possible with some third party tools. On some servers are checks if your squadron or pilot has the supply points or aircraft to fly your choosen machine, if not, you are kicked when you try to take off. The same with sides. If you are registered LW you can't take off with VVS aircraft.

 

You can force a side switch wait period. So if you pick the wrong side, you are forced to wait until you can fly again if you switch sides, and so you are probably out of fight. 

 

Those wait periods can't be fooled by disco and reconnect. He remembers.

This is a BOS feature, no tool necesary.

 

Some kind of object tracking is certainly possible. There are dynamicly changing front lines durring mission and aditional targets are activated after the destruction of primary targets or a number of targets. The front line can move in both directions, its not a prescripted move that can't be undone.

Airbase can change owner in middle of a mission even several times when the front line moves.

 

Aircraft can be made available durring missions and modifications can be unlocked during mission.

 

I think Baron would mayby fill some more options that I dont remember.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

S! All

 

I know everyone is excited about TF and CloD.   I do not want to be Johnny Rain Cloud but I would like to mention something that happened in the RB3D days.   There were some problems with the "Advanced" FM. This was the realistic FM with engine torque etc. Several people worked on it. many good things came out of that but many problems were never solved. Eventually the code was hacked. What was fond was that the problems were the code in the engine itself and that you would need to rewrite the whole thing.   I am afraid that there may be some things that TF may never be able to fix in CloD.  They will make it much better than it is today but be careful in your expectations as there may be some glitches that are the result of the engine itself. Whatever TF does with CloD, I think it will be a year before we see results. While there are people that will put up with the existing minor problems most folks are migrating to BoX. BoX  is supported and advertised and has a lot of online servers.  And yes, everything Pfeil says, is going on in BoX.  777 may have solved much of the limitations on the number of entities that can be alive with their new engine.

 

The big thing in all sims and games is dumbing it down to be a an I phone app. You will get High fidelity sims like DCS  but because the market is small, the price is high.  CloD and BoX are your average sim. They have enough complexity to be a sim but don't take an hour to get into the air. btw I have flown CloD and had to hit flaps, fuel, magneto 1, magneto 2, and a bunch of other stuff to start the engine. It gets better on an HE 111 with twin engines.  Maybe that is a server setting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

S!

 

The dynamic part of BoX  is rather easy.  It is merely activating or deactivating objects or changing the behavior. Very easy to get airfields to change sides.  You merely need to set the conditions or triggers.

 

The map is easy to adjust and changes when the victory conditions for that area are met. 

 

 

Just as easy to set recapture triggers.   The whole front can be very fluid.  The problem for me is that the map is new. I know where Lille is, I know where Douii, Albert, Dixmude, Verdun Nancy are.

 

The deal is to get familiar with the Rail Roads, Regular Roads and Rivers. These are places for targets and triggers. Again,  After an area is captured you can have a support column and retake it or what ever you like.Just set the conditions. The battle does not really have to stop. It just depends on the size of the area and the number of players.  I think with a dedicated server on a good connection that 70 players are OK.  Think War Grounds and when you bomb Pomacle, there are tanks crossing the mud. If you and they destroy all the defenders at the base, it becomes your base and has your planes available.  You now have to defend it and keep up the pressure as you continue the advance.  Where is Ahnold when you need him... "Mobile Strike now!!"

 

Start%20lines_zpsuiw3ffdc.jpg

 

Capture%20lines_zps9endpmqk.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really???  There's only 2?????  Because of the number of different tanks available in CLoD, i actually expected to have even more available in BoS/M.  Especially considering the tank battles on the eastern front were some of the biggest and grandest of the war.  The only other theater that you hear or read about the tank battles is the African Corps vs the British

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok I decided to check out the DCS P-51 and the DCS FW-190D. I like them both. My problem is it looks like its going to be a fighter pilots wet dream online for Normandy map. What about heavy bombers? Yes the pony (and jug if its released) can carry bombs but there is no real bombers planned as far as I can see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok I decided to check out the DCS P-51 and the DCS FW-190D. I like them both. My problem is it looks like its going to be a fighter pilots wet dream online for Normandy map. What about heavy bombers? Yes the pony (and jug if its released) can carry bombs but there is no real bombers planned as far as I can see. 

 

Actually, all of the released planes can carry bombs but I agree... bombers needed to make DCS viable for tournament IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are the people who make DCS any more trustworthy for doing what they say they'll do than the 777 team?

 

Also, I hear a lot of people say that DCS is a "high fidelity" sim.  What exactly does that mean?  Because if it refers to graphics it doesn't look like they're anything special (not referring to terrain; stuff like the inside of the cockpit).  If it refers to FM/Dms, what's the big improvement?  In Barton's video, there was a guy flying around practically the whole time that had a huge cloud of black smoke billowing out behind him, and he didn't even seem to have much loss of performance from the way he was flying.  Forget that the smoke cloud looked pretty hokey and that at times it looked like lightning was striking inside his storm cloud; how could a person that severely damaged fly around for so long?  Most gun camera footage from the time shows the victim breaking up the way that Barton's victim did when he shot the tail end of his fuselage off in one burst, LOL (good one).

 

There's probably a good reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are the people who make DCS any more trustworthy for doing what they say they'll do than the 777 team?

 

I've found that Eagle Dynamics to be very trustworthy.  Yes, it may take them a long time to deliver on their promise (i.e. if they say 2 weeks, assume 5 months).  But... they've always provided exactly what they said they would.  And they've actually gone above and beyond to maintain that trust with their customers.

 

I think the best example is what happened with DCS WW2.

 

Originally, DCS WW2 was a project managed by Ilya Shevchenko (Luthier from RRG Studios and Maddox games).  He started a kickstarter, and made promises.  These promises fell through and the money donated to kickstarter was used and depleted.  Nothing illicit.  But it's safe to say the project got away from them, and things fell apart.

 

Rather than let the project die, Eagle Dynamics stepped in and promised to finish what RRG started, even though they weren't obligated to do so.  DCS Normandy and all of the WW2 aircraft in DCS are the result of that act by ED.  For me, this shows a dedication to follow through on promises, even if those promises were made by their partners.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=126824

 

 

Also, I hear a lot of people say that DCS is a "high fidelity" sim.  What exactly does that mean?  Because if it refers to graphics it doesn't look like they're anything special (not referring to terrain; stuff like the inside of the cockpit).  If it refers to FM/Dms, what's the big improvement?  In Barton's video, there was a guy flying around practically the whole time that had a huge cloud of black smoke billowing out behind him, and he didn't even seem to have much loss of performance from the way he was flying.  Forget that the smoke cloud looked pretty hokey and that at times it looked like lightning was striking inside his storm cloud; how could a person that severely damaged fly around for so long?  Most gun camera footage from the time shows the victim breaking up the way that Barton's victim did when he shot the tail end of his fuselage off in one burst, LOL (good one).

 

There's probably a good reason.

As I've mentioned before, DCS in terms of graphics is highly adaptable. You can run it on low-end computers and have it look okay. However, you can also run it on high-end computers with Ultra settings, and have it look amazing.  Especially if you're flying 2.0 on the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR) map.

 

Basically, 1.5 is the old terrain engine on the old Caucasus map.  However, 1.5 does have the new rendering engine [Eagle Dynamics Graphics Engine (EDGE) featuring DirectX 11] on top of it.  So it looks good.  Just not great.

 

Meanwhile, 2.0 is the new terrain engine on the brand new Nevada map, with EDGE and DX11 on top of it.  And 2.0 is what the Normandy map will be released on as well.  It looks amazing when you crank the graphic settings.

 

When Eagle Dynamics is able to update the Caucasus map (over the next year), they'll port it over to 2.0, elevate the production number to DCS 2.5, and eliminate 1.5.

 

I have a GTX 1080 card. So, this is basically what DCS looks like to me (keeping in mind that this is not my rig and that you have compression from being uploaded to youtube):

 

DCS 1.5 Caucasus:

 

 

DCS 2.0 Nevada:

 

Regarding the term "high fidelity", I'm not specifically sure what you mean.  However, DCS' modules are designed to be as correct as possible.  All of them, with the exception of "Flaming Cliffs 3" (which is not as sophisticated as individual aircraft modules) have fully clickable cockpits, authentically functioning systems, and a fidelity to accuracy.  This is true with the Flight Models as well:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Combat_Simulator#Aerodynamic_flight_models

 

If you fly Flaming Cliffs 3 or the free modules, they may not be 100%.  However, if you fly the pay modules, you can be assured that there is an attempt to make them as realistic as your computer will allow.

 

Regarding the smoke cloud from that aircraft in Barton's video, it's a graphical bug, probably due to server instability or lag.

 

DCS isn't perfect though.  The modules are expensive.  The modules are time consuming to learn (especially if they're modern aircraft).  And multiplayer can sometimes be fragile (though it's been massively improved over the last 2 years).  Additionally, as far as WW2 goes, we're not going to have player-flown bombers.  At least not for a very long time.  So that's a limitation that people should be aware of.

 

However, as I said above, it's probably going to be the most historically accurate WW2 experience on the market.

 

Not sure if that helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...